STATEMENT BY U.S. OFFICIALS
Ambasador James Jeffrey's Remarks at Turkish-American Business Council
Dedeman Hotel
Istanbul, Turkey
January 27, 2010
Ambassador Jeffrey: Good afternoon. First of all I would like to thank Chairman Haluk Dinçer, and everybody from DEIK for this wonderful luncheon and for your coming here today. Last year when I spoke I promised I would try harder in Turkish and improve my Turkish. We will see. I will speak a bit in Turkish a little bit later in my remarks, but the problem I have is I was introduced by Haluk Dinçer. The problem isn't simply that Haluk's English is far better than my Turkish, the problem is that Haluk's English is better than my English. So therefore, I'm somewhat embarrassed to be up here, but I'll do my best in both languages.
What I want to do is talk a bit about, specifically, the economic side of our relationship, because this was a big issue a year ago. It was central to the discussions, particularly between President Gül and President Obama in April. Then it was reiterated when President Obama met with Prime Minister Erdoğan last December 7th. The two announced a new Framework for Strategic, Economic and Commercial Cooperation, and I'll talk a little bit about that and the role of the private sector. And then - and this is where I'll try to get into Turkish - more generally, I'll talk about our relationship and why we think economic as well as strategic relations are so important, what we have in common with Turkey and why Turkey is so important to us. And I'll take a few questions if we have time. So, let me begin.
As I said, since the meeting in April, we've been working hard to try to tackle a very troubling problem in U.S.-Turkish relations, which is why our economic and trade relations remain relatively low, particularly in terms of statistics, when your trade with the European Union over the past decade has boomed, and you're now developing better trade relations for example with the Middle East, with Russia and with the Far East, and even in Africa. Part of this, of course, is Turkey simply developing in every direction and is very successful. But part of it is particular problems with getting into the American market. Because while our trade is relatively low, it's also unbalanced, with most trade flowing to Turkey and not much to the United States, which is obviously important economically and it's important politically, because exports mean jobs and it means high quality jobs, it means foreign currency earnings. And the Turkish government is very right to be concerned about this, as is the American government.
But generating trade is not easy. So the first thing we did is an inventory. Working with this organization and many other Turkish organizations and with American business, we spent many months trying to develop plans and understand some of the problems. The result of this is this framework proposal that we held a ceremony with the U.S. Trade Representative and the Secretary of Commerce of the United States, with Deputy Prime Minister Ali Babacan right after the meeting between Prime Minister Erdoğan and President Obama in December, to launch the framework. And we're looking at tying together a number of different economic, structural, government-to-government meetings and initiatives that we have under the umbrella of this framework. That includes the Trade and Investment Framework Agreement - the TIFA - which will be happening in several months; the Economic Partnership Commission, which we do with the State Department and other agencies, with the Turkish Foreign Ministry and other parts of the Turkish government; and our energy partnership which is very, very important and is tied to strategic orientation. And that's one thing that is important, that I'll mention today, both to the people here and to the press.
Our economic relationship with Turkey is not simply a question of trade statistics, what is exported from America to Turkey, or what is exported from Turkey to the United States. It involves geostrategic cooperation, such as on the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan pipeline, and the work we're doing with Turkey and with other players on Nabucco, trying to find other sources from Azerbaijan to Iraq for gas. It's our cooperative efforts in Iraq - not just on the military and strategic side but also in investment and in energy. We're working very closely with Turkey on that. And there's a whole economic and development side to our close cooperation in Afghanistan and in Pakistan.
In addition, you have many American firms here - Hewlett-Packard and Dow are just two - that use Turkey as a logistical world center for exports to third countries. That doesn't come up in the statistics, but it plays an important role not only in trade but also in investment in technology transfer. And at the top of the high-tech pyramid, in top of the line military trade and aviation, Turkey is a preferred partner of the United States. As many of you know, we've seen in the 787 Dreamliner, a major Turkish component, we see this in Sikorsky helicopters, and on and on and on. The success of Turkish industry if you can find a niche in the United States, as Ford Otosan has been able to find, suddenly, overnight, we go from almost no export of automotive equipment to the United States almost 400 million dollars in one year - and that was a bad year for the national car industry.
So, if we can build on that, we believe that we can find in the next several years, a major increase, perhaps as much as tripling trade between our two countries, and we can find other sectors, such as for example, tourism. ASTA, the American Society of Travel Agents, which is crucial for developing of tourist markets, has chosen for its international meeting of the year which city? Istanbul. And that's not a mistake; that is simply a vote of confidence in Turkey and particularly Istanbul as a major, international class tourism center.
Now most of the people in this room, however, recognize that economic and trade development is not primarily the job for governments, it's a job of the business sector and it's done by private entrepreneurs. The role of government should be to create the legal, regulatory and bureaucratic environment or framework that allows businesses to make transparent decisions driven by shareholder interests and income potential while ensuring fair competition and protecting the public good. The private sector should have a mechanism, thus, to communicate to the Turkish government and to the American government its ideas and concerns for our governments. Now we have a variety of organizations - one of the most distinguished and one of the most important is yours here, today, which works with the American -the ATC and works with other organizations, and we have a variety of American organizations, too. However our laws in setting up any commission or advisory group require us to go directly to private firms. So we're going to be, from the American side, reaching out to private American firms to provide advice to the US government as we work in this framework. And the Turkish government, which has different rules, presumably will be reaching out to organizations such as this one and to TOBB. That's the Turkish government's decision. But nonetheless, we look forward to a very, very active exchange of private sector in public governmental opinion as we move forward to try to eliminate barriers to trade, and to stimulate not just trade but investment, because much of our trade flows from investment. To look at some of the obstacles to trade, to look at ways we can cooperate together. As I've said, we've been successful in some areas, we'll see if we can be successful in others.
In looking at how we work together with Turkish institutions including yours, we believe that we've already seen tremendous cooperation. For example both Haluk Bey and Rifat Hisarcıklıoğlu of TOBB, both participated in a recent meeting between Deputy Prime Minister Babacan, Minister Çağlayan, and several other Cabinet-level officials, and heads of Turkish non-governmental organizations, to talk about ways to build trade and attract inward investment. And of course, as I've said, we have the ATC every year, we have a variety of organizations, we have ABFT, we have TABA, we have TOBB, DEIK, we have TUSIAD and so forth, that are all working together. We need to build on this and we need to gather information on what works and what doesn't.
For example, I was recently briefed on a report contracted with DEIK, and with McKinsey and Company, that contains a very useful analysis of trade issues, and which discussed many ideas focusing on Turkish exports to the United States. The ABFT is about to release its annual survey of American firms on what works and what doesn't work with Turkey. That's very important as well because these people are on the front line of sponsoring trade relations. So we think that we have a very, very active future in front of us with this new framework, building on the relations that already exist and taking advantage of the uptick in the international economic situation in 2010. Turkey will grow significantly this year. Some of you heard Finance Minister Şimşek, and his prediction of last night. The IMF has raised its prediction for the Turkish economy. We believe the American economy will grow as well.
In both of our countries, unemployment remains a serious economic and political factor. It's a delayed symptom of an economic crisis. But nonetheless, we believe that we'll also make progress in this in the coming one or two years. Let me try to explain, and this is where I'll turn it to Turkish, why we, the United States, are putting so much emphasis in Turkey.
Niçin Amerika için Türkiye o kadar önemli, o kadar mühim bir ülke. Her Türkiye ile çalışan Amerikalı başka bir sebepten bahsedebilir fakat ben şahsi olarak şunu söylemek istiyorum, Türkiye ne kadar başarılı bir ülkedir. Herhalde biraz kriz gibi bunu söylüyorum, çünkü her gün gazetelerinizde büyük bir kriz ortaya çıkıyor, bunalım var, çatışma var, bu siyasi grup, öbür siyasi grup, falan filan. Ama bu normaldir. Hem Amerika'da, hem de İngiltere'de, hem de Türkiye'de, böyle durum normaldir. Fakat, Balkanlar'dan Karadeniz üzerine, Ortadoğu'dan Hindistan'a kadar, böyle bir istikrarda, Türkiye kadar başarılı bir ülke yok, Türkiye hariç. Bu çok önemli. Bizim bunu hiç bir zaman unutmamamız gerek. Çünkü Türkiye bizimle bir örnek ortaklık, öbür ülkeler için de örnek olarak çalışabilir.
Aynı zamanda, Türkiye, güvenlik ihraç eden bir ülkedir. Bu çok önemli. Genel olarak ben örnekler söylemek istemiyorum, ama genel olarak Amerika güvenliği tüketen ülkeler ile çalışıyor, fakat Türkiye güvenlik ihraç eden bir ülkedir. Özellikle bu yeni sıfır problem siyaseti içinde. Hem Kafkaslar'da Ermenistan ile, hem de Kıbrıs ile, Irak ile, Erbil falan filan, ile çok başarılı bir siyaset bu. Onun için biz son derece yakın şekilde Türkiye ile siyaset ile [inaudible] alanda çalışıyoruz.
Fakat halen daha yoğun şekilde biz Türkiye [inaudible]. Niçin, çünkü söylediğim gibi, çok başarılı bir ülkeniz var. Mesela, G-20 içinde Türkiye 16 veya 17. en büyük ekonomi.
Fakat tabii ben şahsi olarak başarınız için üç sebep olduğunu düşünüyorum. İlk olarak Türk halkı. Bu halk, demokrasi, özgürlük seven, serbest piyasa ve teşebbüs seven bir halk. Türkiye istikrarsız bir bölgede istikrarlı bir ülke olarak bulunuyor. Bu bir kaza değil. Bu demek ki Türk halkı her zaman -hiç bir halk her zaman doğru kararlar almıyor, fakat genel olarak öbür ülkelere kıyasla, Türk halkı doğru kararlar alıyor.
İkinci sebep ise, bir adam; Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Sadece Türkiye'nin 20. Yüzyıl lideri olduğu için değil - hepimizin lideri oldu, çünkü bir örnek verdi. 1. Dünya Savaşından sonra bu istikrarsız bölgelerde, ve Osmanlı İmparatorluğu şüphesiz istikrarsız bir bölgedeydi. Ve savaş olunca, öbür bölgede bir akım yaratanlar, İtalya'da Mussolini, Almanya'da bir Hitler, Rusya'da bir Lenin ve bir Stalin Çin'de Mao Zedong, Japonya'da Hirohito, İspanya'da bir Franco. Yani obür ülkeler, öbür halklara hücum edin, saldırın liderleri. Türkiye çok başka bir siyaset izledi, ve Mustafa Kemal Atatürk'ün söylediği gibi, Yurt'ta Sulh, Cihan'da Sulh. Bu kelimeler hem o zamanda, hem de bugün çok önemlidir.
Üçünçu sebep, bence, Türkiye ve uluslararası toplum, ve özellikle batı toplumu arasındaki ilişkileridir. Kore savaşından sonra şimdiye kadar Türkiye ile Batı dünyası arasındaki ilişkiler hem Batı için, Amerika da dahil, hem de Türkiye için çok faydalı. Ne vardı? NATO vardı. Gümrük Birliği vardı. 2001 IMF ile anlaşması vardı ve şimdi de görebiliyoruz ki, bu son bunalım boyunca Türkiye'nin finans durumu çok sağlıklı durabildi. Niçin? Çünkü Türkiye ile IMF arasındaki anlaşma gerçekten bir istikamet verdi, hem IMF için hem de Türkiye için. Türkiye ile Avrupa Birliği üyelik müracaati çok önemli. Onun için Başkan Obama her Avrupa lideri ile ziyaret yaparken bunu [inaudible]. Onun için bu ilişkiler eskiden de son derece önemliydi, ve şimdi ve gelecekte de önemli kalacaktır. Çok sağolun.
Haluk Dinçer: Sayın Büyükelçi'ye bu güzel konuşma için teşekkür ediyoruz, kendisi salondan soru alabileceğini belirtmişti, dolayısı ile sorularınızı bekliyoruz.
Ambassador Jeffrey: İnşallah İngilizce'dir çünkü Türkçe'den sonra zorluk çekiyorum, fakat Türkçe olursa çalışırım.
Barçın Yinanç: Barçın Yinanç from Daily News, Ambassador, thank you very much for this speech. Two questions, basically. As you said, the economics between Turkey and America is not just simple statistics, it involves geo-strategic relations as well, that's why I guess you wouldn't find it bizarre if I asked a question on Turkish-Israeli relations. As you are aware of the recent situation between Turkey and Israel, which I suppose are one of the biggest allies in the region of the United States. There are two lines of thinking as to where the United States stands on this issue. One line says that the United States is concerned that two of its allies are in trouble and that the US administration had been telling the Turkish government to keep it down or to change its position. The other line of thinking would rather say that the Obama administration does not see eye to eye on the Gaza issue with the Israelis, therefore it suits its interest that Turkey is bashing Israel on that issue. I was wondering which line of thinking is the right one. My second question would be, you have mentioned yourself, Nabucco. My question is what is your reaction on the Turkish decision to let the Russian alternative and competitive project of South Stream, passing Turkish territorial waters. Don't you think that that would hamper the realization of Nabucco. Whether you have said anything on that to the Turkish government? Thank you, sir.
Ambassador Jeffrey: Thank you very much, Barçın. On Turkish American relations, first of all, countries have differences. We have differences with Turkey, Turkey has differences with us, Turkey has differences with Israel, we have differences with Israel, that's normal. And we understand this, and we're not surprised by it. What we do believe, though, is that mutually advantageous relations, relationships that have seen a lot of commitment in the past, a lot of -we call it in economic terms, most of you are business people, sum costs - should be preserved if at all possible. Thus we urge both sides, the Israelis and the Turks, to try overcome the current rough spot in the relationship and we've seen considerable progress. You've had a variety of Israeli officials, including just the last several weeks the Minister of Defense and former Prime Minister, Barak, and the Secretary General of the Foreign Ministry here. We've seen contracts signed, we've seen military exercises continuing, we've seen a variety of positive developments and we're very encouraged by that.
On Nabucco, I think Prime Minister Erdoğan said it very well. You'll remember Mr. Putin made a comment when he was here in August about rivals, and Prime Minister Erdoğan basically said, they're not rivals, they're two different projects. That's how we look at it. We're not opposed to any project that will help provide energy resources to the world and to Europe. We think that these projects should be diverse, we think that the more different sources, the more different transit routes and the more commercial the deals, the better. Thus we particularly support Nabucco, but we're not opposed to anything.
Benan Kepsutlu: Hello, this is Benan Kepsutlu from HaberTürk Television, actually I have two questions. First of all, if the situation will be getting worse in Afghanistan, do you think that NATO or the United States wants to give other tasks to the Turkish Army, for example joining the combat operation? And secondly, our Foreign Minister, Ahmet Davutoğlu, said that it's possible to be a mediator or a peacemaker between Afghanistan and Taliban if necessary; also the American Commander Stanley McChrystal mentioned about it. Do you think that it's possible, or what would you like to say? It's possible to make an agreement with Taliban by Turkey's mediation? Thank you.
Ambassador Jeffrey: OK, thank you. First of all, any military situation is fluid, and no one, particularly one such as I who is not responsible for military operations, can predict what NATO, or the member-states of NATO including Turkey, will decide is the necessary level or quality or conditions of combat employment in the future. As General McChrystal recently said, you'll remember, he gave an interview, and this is based upon Turkey's very significant doubling of its force presence in Afghanistan, and Turkey's great contributions with its PRT in Wardak and other initiatives including possibly a new PRT in the future, including its training of the Afghan security forces. That's just on the security side. In terms of development assistance, education, agricultural support and such, Turkey is second to none in Afghanistan and we much appreciate its work. In terms of the Taliban, this is clearly a subject that is under review both in the meetings here this week, in the summit between the three leaders, the Friends of Afghanistan, and in the London Summit. I don't want to pre-judge what Secretary Clinton will decide. What I will say is this is a complicated question. General McChrystal discussed it at some length in general terms. But as I know from my experience in Iraq where we pursued a policy of trying to insert a wedge in the insurgency, the devil is always in the details. And one of the most important things is to ensure that the international community's position is closely coordinated with that of the government you're supporting. And that's all I'll say on that question. Thank you.